The present disclosure relates to systems and methods that process signals over a cable transmission network.
Although Cable Television (CATV) networks originally delivered content to subscribers over large distances using an exclusively RF transmission system, modern CATV transmission systems have replaced much of the RF transmission path with a more effective optical network, creating a hybrid transmission system where cable content originates and terminates as RF signals over coaxial cables, but is converted to optical signals for transmission over the bulk of the intervening distance between the content provider and the subscriber. Specifically, CATV networks include a head end at the content provider for receiving RF signals representing many channels of content. The head end receives the respective RF content signals, multiplexes them using an RF combining network, converts the combined RF signal to an optical signal (typically by using the RF signal to modulate a laser) and outputs the optical signal to a fiber-optic network that communicates the signal to one or more nodes, each proximate a group of subscribers. The node then reverses the conversion process by de-multiplexing the received optical signal and converting it back to an RF signal so that it can be received by viewers.
Cable television (CATV) networks have continuously evolved since first being deployed as relatively simple systems that delivered video channels one-way from a content provider. Early systems included transmitters that assigned a number of CATV channels to separate frequency bands, each of approximately 6 MHz. Subsequent advancements permitted limited return communication from the subscribers back to the content provider either through a dedicated, small low-frequency signal propagated onto the coaxial network. Modern CATV networks, however, provide for not only a much greater number of channels of content, but also provide data services (such as Internet access) that require much greater bandwidth to be assigned for both forward and return paths. In the specification, the drawings, and the claims, the terms “forward path” and “downstream” may be interchangeably used to refer to a path from a head end to a node, a node to an end-user, or a head end to an end user. Conversely, the terms “return path” “reverse path” and “upstream” may be interchangeably used to refer to a path from an end user to a node, a node to a head end, or an end user to a head end.
Recent improvements in CATV architectures that provide further improvements in delivery of content include Fiber-to-the Premises (FTTP) architectures that replace the coaxial network between a node and a subscriber's home with a fiber-optic network. Such architectures are also called Radio Frequency over Glass (RFoG) architectures. A key benefit of RFoG is that it provides for faster connection speeds and more bandwidth than current coaxial transmission paths are capable of delivering. For example, a single copper coaxial twisted pair conductor can carry six simultaneous phone calls, while a single fiber pair can carry more than 2.5 million phone calls simultaneously. Furthermore, coaxial cable, depending on the type/size/conductor) may have tens of dBs of losses per hundreds of feet (and the higher the RF frequency desired, the higher the coaxial cable losses). In HFC networks these losses require placement of in-line RF amplifiers. Conversely, optical FTTP has fewer losses and no need for in-line amplifiers. FTTP also allows consumers to bundle their communications services to receive telephone, video, audio, television, any other digital data products or services simultaneously.
One existing impairment of RFoG communication channels is Optical Beat Interference (OBI), which afflicts traditional RFoG networks. OBI occurs when two or more reverse path transmitters are powered on, and are very close in wavelength to each other. OBI limits upstream traffic, but also can limit downstream traffic. Existing efforts at mitigating OBI have focused on Optical Network Units (ONUs) at the customer premises, or on the CMTS at the head end. For example, some attempts to mitigate OBI make the ONUs wavelength specific while other attempts create an RFoG-aware scheduler in the CMTS. Still others attempts have included changing ONU wavelengths on the fly. Due to the fundamental nature of lasers and DOCSIS traffic, none of the above techniques yield satisfactory results as wavelength collisions still occur or cost is high. Thus, it may be desirable in RFoG deployments to further reduce or eliminate OBI.